ENnies discussion thread

[Crothian]

It also comes down to how much turn over should we have? As I pointed out we did have 2 of 5 new judges last year. That's pretty good. Who knows what the ratio will be this year, we have to wait till the voting happens.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

To be fair - the fact that some express the opinion from a "sour grapes" perspective does not mean that the thought does not have some merit. True things can still be said by sour people.

I never said otherwise.

 

[talinthas]

i don't have 'sour grapes' as it were. I've never tried to be a judge, and this year i'm planning on being in Japan during gencon. I also really like the folks who were judges last year, so i don't really have an agenda outside of just keeping it fresh =)

 

[Crothian]

i don't have 'sour grapes' as it were. I've never tried to be a judge, and this year i'm planning on being in Japan during gencon. I also really like the folks who were judges last year, so i don't really have an agenda outside of just keeping it fresh =)

Tha'ts fine. How would you success that it happens though? Do we limit the number of times people can be judges? Do we have sperate voting, one for previous judges and one for non previous judges, and take the top three from one and the top 2 from another?

 

[fusangite]

I'm somewhat of an informed amateur when it comes to voting systems and I have worked with mathematicians who are voting systems experts. I had some pretty significant concerns about the voting system last year.

What voting system are you guys planning to use this year and why?

I vaguely remember you guys using Borda counting last year but it's all a bit hazy now. Obviously, there is a serious problem with Borda systems in that they tend to encourage destructive strategic voting behaviour that conceals people's genuine voting preferences. As Borda himself said, "My system is designed to be used by gentlemen," acknowledging that if people vote in a truly self-interested way, the system will produce wacky, unrepresentative results. It seems to me that the obvious systems to choose among are single transferrable vote, single non-transferable vote and multi-member plurality.

I think that as these awards become more credible, we have to be more attentive to them being genuinely above reproach. I think making sure that we have a defensible voting system is an important thing to do.

Also, I'm pleased that we're cultivating a credible, trustworthy set of judges who continue to win our confidence every year. I think this can only improve the awards' credibility with people. If we dump our judges every year, what kind of message does that send about our confidence in our past awards? So I think ENWorlders have been voting quite intelligently in past elections; that's not to say we shouldn't replace a judge if someone more qualified comes along... but let that be the reason an incumbent loses.

 

[Crothian]

I'm somewhat of an informed amateur when it comes to voting systems and I have worked with mathematicians who are voting systems experts. I had some pretty significant concerns about the voting system last year.

What voting system are you guys planning to use this year and why?

I'll give this a shot. Unless we have a reason to change from the old system, we will use the old system. People rank each book 1-10, with an option to pick if they are not familar with the book. I have no idea what it is called.

 

[Barak]

That is the Borda system, and, well, it has more problems than qualities, as far as I'm concerned, sadly.

 

[MonsterMash]

I think that we should try to get some new blood on the judging panel this year. I really appreciate the work of the previous judges, but i think that the awards would benefit from at least a partially new perspective, you know? If judges become institutionalised then the awards will start reflecting their biases, even though a lot of us implicitly trust Crotian and T-Billy's opinions anyway. Just a thought.

But that relies on people coming forward as judges.


This year I know I don't have the time or rules knowledge (though I suppose I have played D&D in numerous versions (OD&D, B/XD&D, 1e, 3.0, 3.5), Runequest2, CoC (BRP), Traveller, Bunnies & Burrows, Toon, Metamorphosis Alpha, and Paranoia. - Actually maybe I do know enough different RPGs then, but time is an issue.

 

[Conaill]

That is the Borda system, and, well, it has more problems than qualities, as far as I'm concerned, sadly.

Nope, not Borda. Crothian was not entirely accurate in his description, in the sense that voters got to *score* each option from 1-10, instead of *ranking* them. Of course, that only makes the problem worse...

 

[Conaill]

It seems to me that the obvious systems to choose among are single transferrable vote, single non-transferable vote and multi-member plurality.

Uhm... maybe I'm misunderstanding you, or perhaps you used the wrong terms there... but I thought the latter two systems (single non-transferable vote and multi-member plurality) refer to situations where you need to elect multiple winners (e.g. a district with multiple seats to be filled).

My personal favorites are approval voting (i.e. checkboxes!) and instant runoff voting (aka single transferable voting).

As I mentioned on the previous page, we had a good discussion last year of why the current voting systems had serious problems, and possible alternatives. Check this thread: ENnies V - and beyond...